USC Researchers Invent Longer-Lasting Lithium-Ion Battery

Researchers at the University of Southern California (USC) have come up with a new design for lithium-ion batteries that can hold more energy and recharge within a mere 10 minutes.

A team led by Chongwu Zhou, professor at the USC Viterbi School of Engineering, replaced the graphite anodes that are typically used in the batteries with porous silicon nanoparticles to come up with the new design, which can be used in a range of applications, from mobile devices to hybrid cars.

Zhou said, in a press release, that the research "opens the door for the design of the next-generation lithium-ion batteries." He worked with a team of graduate students as well as researcher Yunhao Lu at the Zhejiang University in China on the invention. The batteries could be available in two to three years, according to Zhou. USC’s Viterbi School funded the research.

Researchers at the University of Southern California, led by Professor Chongwu Zhou, replaced graphite with porous silicon nanoparticles in anodes of lithium-ion batteries to come up with a new design. The battery, which could be available in two to three years, has a longer life and charges more quickly than lithium-ion batteries used now. (Source: Mingyuan Ge & Chongwu Zhou/USC)

The work is certainly not the first time researchers have tried to use silicon in anodes -- the place where the current flows into a battery -- because it’s inexpensive and has a high potential capacity. However, previous designs could not stand up to the charging and discharging cycles in which the anodes swell and shrink repeatedly. The small plates of silicon that were part of earlier silicon anode designs broke down after repeated use, researchers said.

The trick of the design Zhou’s team came up with are porous silicon nanowires that are less than 100 nanometers in diameter and a few microns long. Small pores on the wires allow silicon to expand and contract without breaking, researchers said. They also increase the surface area of the anode, which enables lithium ions to stream in and out of the battery more quickly.

All of this results in a stronger battery in a less expensive design, researchers said. However, there were a couple of drawbacks to the design. One is that the nanowires are difficult to manufacture in large quantities. To get around this problem, researchers took small silicon spheres, which are commercially available, and gave them the same pores as the nanowires.

Another weakness in the design is that the battery’s lifespan isn’t as long as traditional graphite-based design -- 200 recharge cycles for the silicon nanoparticle batteries versus 500 for traditional batteries. The team will continue to research ways to change the nanoparticle element of the battery to improve this metric, Zhou said: "The easy method we use may generate real impact on battery applications in the near future."

In future research, the team also will seek a new cathode material with a high capacity to use together with the porous silicon nanowires and/or porous silicon nanoparticles to completely overhaul the battery design, researchers said.

The perspective of "talk time" is the user's, which is why the term was invented. Although it's therefore a "marketing" term, it gave a much clearer picture of what the challenge actually was, i.e., improve and extend the system function and therefore the user experience, something that can get lost when looking only at specs. As mentioned, that was back in the day: cell phones were used for talking only, and batteries didn't last very long, certainly not as long as users expected. These days we should also be saying "text time" as Al points out.

Recharging in 10 minutes is a very valuable feature. With smartphones, talk time seems to be meaningless in terms of how the battery is doing. The data connection is the big user of power at least for me. Maybe I'm not talking as much as others versus texting, surfing. Amp-hours is probably more accurate but definitely a tech spec in comparing models.

Come to think of it, Chuck, I guess amp-hours is a useful metric for general comparison purposes. I do look at that number when I'm purchasing rechargeable AA cells. Sure, manufacturer X is optimized for application Y, but it is a good starting point that is probably at least as accurate as talk hours.

Chuck is right, "talk time" varies from one battery brand and model to the next. Length of charge or how long charge is retained is probably the appropriate term & spec for comparison purposes. Although actual talk time, i.e., actual usage time, is shorter than how long a battery retains its charge. That's why the term "talk time" was invented: how long can you continue to use the product?

Hi, Pubudu, sorry I don't know offhand that information but I will take a look at the info about the research online and see if I can find out. Here is a link to a press release about the research: http://news.usc.edu/#!/article/46778/cheap-strong-lithium-ion-battery-developed-at-usc/

Jack, I didn't think of that, but it would be a good idea to have a standard for comparison. Funny, but as important as the battery is, it seems we sometimes often forget about it when buying a gadget if we are determined to have the latest and most innovatively designed device. Or maybe that's just me!

"Talk time" is application dependent, so the same battery might have a different talk time from one application to the next. So I would imagine the best way to express it would be in the battery manufacturer's parlance -- Amp-hours -- wouldn't it?

Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.